High Velocity PPCB Comments?

[CJR]

I tend to view PPCB as being in two distinct classes; i.e. low velocity: up to about 2200 fps and high velocity :from 2200 to 3000+ fps. I'm interested in the high velocity area. The NRA had to play around with lubricant types,amount of lubricant, sizing diameters, bullet designs, etc. to obtain consistent accuracy at 3000+ fps. For those here loading for high velocity PPCB, have you found any other significant loading parameters(better bullet designs, better lubricants,etc.)/techniques (paper type, patch coverage, etc.)that need to be applied? I'd be interested in what you've discovered for accurate high velocity PPCB.

Best regards,

CJR

[docone31]

I use the standard Lee lube land .30cal casting. I size it to .308, wrap with two layers of notebook paper, size it to .309. I use Auto Wax lightly for the final sizeing.
That is all I use.
With 40.4gns of powder, it does the trick.

[pdawg_shooter]

From a earlier post....Back in November of 08 I decided to develop a sub-MOA, 3000fps load for a 30 caliber rifle. It took awhile, but I believe I have “got er done.”
The Rifle.
In order to get the velocity I wanted with this weight bullet I chose a 300RUM in a Savage model 116. It is stainless with a laminated stock. It came from the factory with pillar bedding, and I added glass behind the recoil lug, and under the front receiver ring and tang. I topped it with a Weaver T15 for this test. This rifle will group ¾ to 7/8 with good jacketed bullet loads.
The Bullet.
The most consistently accurate 30cal bullet I cast is the Lyman 311284 so this is the one I worked with. The alloy is a mix of WW and Linotype. I added lino. until an air cooled bullet tested 16.0 BHN on my Lee tester. The bullet was then sized .3015 with a push through die. This gave me full length bearing surface. The bullet was then patched with 16# green bar printer paper and allowed to dry overnight. I then clipped the tail, lubed with White Label BAC and run through a .310 push through die. This left the bullet .311 and ready to load. The finish weight, with patch, was 202gr.
The Brass.
I used new Remington brass. I full length sized them and sorted by weight allowing no more than +/- 1%. It was then trimmed to length, outside neck turned to .012 thickness, the primer pocket reamed to a uniform depth, flash holes drilled uniform and deburred. I then loaded with a 180gr. Core Lock and H4831 to fireform. The test load was then loaded in UNSIZED brass. I tried H1000, Retumbo, and finally settled on reloader25. The starting load was 88.0 and I worked up to 93.0. This gave me 3069 with no signs of excess pressure. Oh yes, the primer was a Federal 215. The bullets were seated about ¼ inch into the case and finished seating when the bolt was closed. This gave me an OAL of 3.670.
The Test.
Testing was done over 2 days. Shots were fired over a bench rest with a windage and elevation adjustable front rest and “bunny ear” rear rest. Twenty 3 shot groups were fired allowing the barrel to cool completely. The smallest group measured .760 and the largest was 1.140. The overall average figured out to .992. Mission accomplished, but just barely. So what good is this load? Not much unless you like poking holes in paper. Next step will be to neck size, seat to correct OAL and see how they shoot. Might make a good hunting load that way.
I do load some jacketed 180, 200, and 220 grain bullets for this one. It now wears a Simmons 3.5x10 scope. Maybe some day I can go elk hunting.

[Baron von Trollwhack]

FWIW, You may look into the latest on microchrystalline bullet wax on 6BR.com. They claim accuracy and easier cleanup, less bore wear.

Thats what LEE sizing lube is to a large degree. Now I dont shoot HI-VEL PP but I've used that Lee wax for a long time and I think it helps accuracy and cleanup at least in 45-70 & PP43 Mauser. But I also have shot thousands of rounds in 223 and 7.5 Swiss with waxed J bullets and I'll continue the practice.

BvT

[CJR]

Docone 31

Any estimate on velocity?

Pdawg

Outstanding testing effort. Well done!

Baron von Trollwhack

Thanks for the tip on the wax. I've using a Dupont Teflon/Wax spray at about 2700 fps, based on what the NRA used in their 3000+fps tests.

This summer, I plan to approach max. velocity in my 308, with PPCB, and see what consistent accuracy I get . Then I'll move on to a 300 H&H for 3000+ fps testing. My bullet is 311291 and if I need to lighten it a bit for high velocity, I'll hollow point it with my lathe. If I get my group buy LBT LFN 30 cal mold in time, I'll test the 311291 against the LBT LFN to see which is more accurate.

Best regards,

CJR

[yondering]

I think a lot of folks are over-thinking the whole paper patch thing. Paper patching for smokeless is very simple.
-You don't need special lubes on the paper; a little sizing wax helps to push the wrapped bullet through the sizing die, but that's all you need.
-You don't need to go out and buy special paper, ordinary printer paper works fine.
-In a lot of cases, if patching a normal grease groove bullet, you don't need to size the bullet before wrapping. Size once after wrapping, that's it.
-If you patch correctly, so the paper is compressed tightly during the final sizing, alloy and bullet hardness is not critical for accuracy. You can get good accuracy with hard or soft bullets, depending what you want.

The only really important criteria I've found in paper patching are:
- The patch should cover the whole driving and bore ride portions of the bullet; no lead should touch the bore.
- The patch should be very tightly compressed during final sizing, with no wet lube applied. Paper will compress down to a smooth hard material, that will grip the rifling better than un-compressed paper.
- Size to fit the throat. Never mind bore/groove dimensions.
- Seating depth should be such that the front edge of the paper just barely engages the rifling.

I shoot 250gr PP bullets in my Whelen at 2700+ fps. Like any reloading, you have to try different bullets to find what works best in your gun.

[CJR]

Yondering,

Thanks for your insight! Before I started viewing this forum, all I had was the NRA work to go by. The NRA approached high velocity PPCB with a certain mindset. I didn' t know if the NRA's approach was "overkill" or "underkill". What I hope will evolve from this thread are the "essential" important factors needed for accurate high velocity PPCB without the "gingerbread frosting".

Best regards,

CJR

[45 2.1]

I think a lot of folks are over-thinking the whole paper patch thing. Paper patching for smokeless is very simple.
-You don't need special lubes on the paper; a little sizing wax helps to push the wrapped bullet through the sizing die, but that's all you need.
-You don't need to go out and buy special paper, ordinary printer paper works fine.
-In a lot of cases, if patching a normal grease groove bullet, you don't need to size the bullet before wrapping. Size once after wrapping, that's it. You can easily achieve 1 MOA accuracy doing it that way with most any lubricant. However, if you want better accuracy, it is best to cast it to the correct size and patch up with the proper thickness paper to just under throat size. Sizing a grease groove boolit to correct size before patching works almost as well. Results from doing this will be quite a bit better. The patch lube has quite an effect also....... choose wisely.
-If you patch correctly, so the paper is compressed tightly during the final sizing, alloy and bullet hardness is not critical for accuracy. You can get good accuracy with hard or soft bullets, depending what you want.

The only really important criteria I've found in paper patching are:
- The patch should cover the whole driving and bore ride portions of the bullet; no lead should touch the bore.
- The patch should be very tightly compressed during final sizing, with no wet lube applied. Paper will compress down to a smooth hard material, that will grip the rifling better than un-compressed paper.
- Size to fit the throat. Never mind bore/groove dimensions.
- Seating depth should be such that the front edge of the paper just barely engages the rifling. Very good information.

[yondering]

However, if you want better accuracy, it is best to cast it to the correct size and patch up with the proper thickness paper to just under throat size.

I respectfully disagree with this concept for smokeless powder use. By patching up to the desired diameter, and not sizing, you aren't compressing the paper. Uncompressed paper doesn't grip the rifling nearly as well. The only way to get a good tight fit with this method is to depend on bullet upset to crush the paper against the rifling; I figure why depend on something that doesn't have to be depended on? I think this method is a carry-over from black powder methods, and doesn't apply as well to smokeless uses.

We almost need separate forums for black powder and smokeless paper patching, they are quite different.

[docone31]

I agree with Yondering.
I have seen a difference in the few experiments I did.
An unsized patch, is not that stable to me.

[45 2.1]

I agree with Yondering.
I have seen a difference in the few experiments I did.
An unsized patch, is not that stable to me.

I am NOT trying to change either of you OR the way you guys do things. I simply stated the results of my extensive tests over a couple of decades in quite a few calibers and bore sizes useing patched boolits. Typically I can get 1/2 MOA out of patched 4570 boolits doing it my way. 30 calibers have run in the 5/8 to 3/4MOA when I get things right. Not to great of a difference between methods, but its there none-the-less.

[pdawg_shooter]

I size my patched and lubed bullets to remove excess lube. Makes it neater when loading. However, when I use 50/50 alox and JPW for lube I do not size again. I can see no differrence in accuracy. If the patch is applied wet and correctly it will shrink to a hard "jacket."

[303Guy]

I shall be doing a test with dry wrapped patches when work stops interfering (I have to pass up a deer hunt tomorrow morning followed by a magpie shoot and chance to test my pig gun and my BSA&M carbine with paper patches:-( ). I get the impression that dry-wrapped patches are tougher than wet wrapped but not as tight but on a smooth sided boolit, the wet patch can be dislodged through mistreatment just as easily. I do use a twist and slide action to tighten the dry patch and I do have to use a dab of glue on the tail corner (the glue has no influence on the patch disintegration. I could just seat the patched boolit as I wrap them).

[Baron von Trollwhack]

One of the issues involving wet patches regardless of GG or smooth bullets to be patched, or even diameter, sized or not, is the "patch" itself. 100% cotton or linen bond, or unobtanium bank note paper is a horse of a different color than computer paper or most any other paper and has noticeably different characteristics, such as shrink % from dry for final thickness, and, indeed, hardness. BvT

[CJR]

Apparently, the experience stated here is widely different than what the former NRA PP experimenter, i.e. Ed Harris, stated. I have a comment from Ed Harris, stated on the Cast Bullet Association website,i.e. " Wouldn't recommend them for hunting as heavy loads require strong alloys such as linotype at pressures which are approaching 50,000CUP. They do not perform well for hunting loads, but shatter upon impact and would cause poor penetration with a violent surface wound like a varmint bullet. The alloys which work best with PP for hunting bullets from 12-14 BHN do not enable appreciably higher velocities with PP than you can get with a properly set up lubricated GC check bullet".

As "pdawg shooter" proved in this thread; he's getting 3069 fps with no signs of excess pressure with a 16 BHN hard PPCB and decent accuracy to boot! If this isn't a good CB load for hunting, what is? Getting accurate PPCB loads with an air-cooled CB at 3000+fps is astounding to me. Seems like we need to completely rethink what was advocated early in the NRA development of PPCB loads and establish new rules based on our collective experiences.

Though my initial PPCB testing got 2700 fps with acceptable accuracy, my bullets were not linotype. So far I'm a believer that accurate 3000+ fps can be achieved WITHOUT using linotype.

Best regards,

CJR

[yondering]

Yer on the right track.

My impression is that the NRA testing was a little shortsighted, and tried to use too much of the blackpowder methods, without really thinking through what was happening in the bore.

One big advantage of paper patching is you can tailor the alloy specifically for the end of the bullet's travel (impact on game) and not worry about it in the bore, unlike a grease groove bullet which has to be tailored carefully for the pressure of firing, with extra consideration for lube, gas checks, etc.

You certainly can get good accuracy with a soft alloy paper patch bullet; in fact, you'd probably have to be careful not to use something too soft for the velocity intended, just because it might blow up on game if too soft.

You can also get good accuracy with the same bullet at low pressure or high pressure, which isn't always the case with grease groove bullets.

[303Guy]

I'd say the folks who did the NRA trials had to start somewhere and they - like I would have been - tested pretty much down there own thought process tracks. We have the advantage of all kinds of folks with different ideas, guns, thought process and we can cross-pollinate our ideas via a very good forum. (That includes having our notions and 'conclusions' challanged so that we are forced into keeping an open mind!:roll:)

[RMulhern]

I respectfully disagree with this concept for smokeless powder use. By patching up to the desired diameter, and not sizing, you aren't compressing the paper. Uncompressed paper doesn't grip the rifling nearly as well. The only way to get a good tight fit with this method is to depend on bullet upset to crush the paper against the rifling; I figure why depend on something that doesn't have to be depended on? I think this method is a carry-over from black powder methods, and doesn't apply as well to smokeless uses.

We almost need separate forums for black powder and smokeless paper patching, they are quite different.

yondering

"We almost need separate forums for black powder and smokeless paper patching, they are quite different."

YOU GOT THAT RIGHT!![smilie=w::veryconfu:coffee:

[Nobade]

It wasn't 3000 fps, but yesterday I ran a bunch of PP ammo through my Garand with very good results. #308241, cast from ACWW, sized to .309, patched with 9# onionskin, lubed with wax, sized to .309, loaded over 47gr. IMR4895 and seated to be a firm press into the throat, but without resistance so the bolt would close. I didn't try them feeding through the magazine, just single loaded. But they were tracking with the sights out to 500M and had no trouble hitting any of the hanging steel I could see through the iron sights. Certainly at least as accurate as normal ball HXP ball ammo. I was certainly pleased!

[docone31]

Yeppir.
Works for me also.
I also suspect there is a big diffenect between BP, and Smokeless.

[TomBulls]

The only really important criteria I've found in paper patching are:
- The patch should cover the whole driving and bore ride portions of the bullet; no lead should touch the bore.
- The patch should be very tightly compressed during final sizing, with no wet lube applied. Paper will compress down to a smooth hard material, that will grip the rifling better than un-compressed paper.
- Size to fit the throat. Never mind bore/groove dimensions.
- Seating depth should be such that the front edge of the paper just barely engages the rifling.

I shoot 250gr PP bullets in my Whelen at 2700+ fps. Like any reloading, you have to try different bullets to find what works best in your gun.

^ This tracks with the recommendations that Lee gives with their bullet moulds. Lee's recommendation is that if a bullet will chamber, then it probably doesn't need sizing. Probably explains why a .338 diam. bullet can chamber and shoot well in a .329/.335 bore in a Steyr M95 8x56r.

[CJR]

Gee, I almost forgot about this thread. But it's appropriate to list my "lessons learned" since the start of this thread.
1. I had random success in heavily sizing GGCB for PP; i.e. sometimes perfect sized CB and then sometimes sized CB with GG missing on one side. That prompted my son and I to design some special PPCB moulds that LBT's Veral Smith made for us. They drop near perfect round CB where the minimal sizing required just trues the OD. Very few CB rejects from LBT 4-cavity moulds and very, very close weights. These designs were slight improvements to the NRA PPCB designs.
2. I've standardized on two powders; WW748 and WW760.
3. SubMOA groups are regularly achieved in my 308W with a 150 gr. LBT LFN @ 3000+fps and WW748. My new PPCB designs are close to subMOA but not yet consistent.
4. My son and I achieved 3200+fps in a 300H&H with hunting accuracy @ 100 yds, but we're still "tweeking" parameters and closing in on the "magic PPCB parameters". We also got hunting accuracy with a 375H&H using a poor CB design, as well as hunting accuracy with a 300 Sav. We then regrouped and now only concentrate on PP the 308W & 300 H&H to achieve subMOA with our new designed/cloned NRA PPCB. We will revisit the other calibers after we finish our current testing and get some new moulds made.
5. Our biggest problems, in all our PPCB testing,were equipment related. New scopes which initially held zero started to randomly change zero very slightly at each shot, mounts were not flush with receiver rings because receiver rings were angled and ring tops not parallel to each other, flexing scope bases that loosened mounting screws (375H&H), poor scope rings quality, CB runout problems with reloading seating dies used, etc., etc. I eliminated all my base problems by going to steel Picatinny bases(3x stiffer than aluminum), mounted on trued receiver rings, changed all scope rings to lapped TPS steel rings, and designed new scope turrets that now lock to prevent any zero changes. Also went back to sand bags on the bench because of too much movement on a adjustable front rest. Also changed all my seating dies to benchrest precision types and started checking
CB concentricity/CB runout on every PPCB round.

The positive things that resulted from all these adventures was that we achieved a lot of range time which resulted in steadily shrinking groups at 100 yds. This has been an incredible journey, for my son and I, and has been very satisfying. Motivation comes very easily, particularly when you see the prices on match jacket bullets approaching $50/box of 100.

Also, thanks everyone for sharing your experiences. Please continue to share your PPCB experiences so that we can further the "state-of-the-arft" of accurate high velocity PPCB.

Best regards,

CJR

[GunStuff]

This has been a great thread. There was some speculation earlier in the thread whether a softer or harder alloy would be needed for penetration on game. Now that high velocity smokeless PP cartridges are accurate and work well. Has anyone any experience on game?

[CJR]

Gunstuff,

Good question! I'm looking forward to hearing descriptions of PPCB performance on game. I have yet to see what a 3000* fps 150 gr. LBT LFN will do on a deer. I've been close but not there yet. However, I would suspect that a PPCB around 13BHN-16BHN PPCB, with a high energy shock wave attached to the nose, would have devastating effects once it enters the chest cavity. Likewise the penetration should be great for a good blood trail.

Best regards,

CJR

[TomBulls]

This has been a great thread. There was some speculation earlier in the thread whether a softer or harder alloy would be needed for penetration on game. Now that high velocity smokeless PP cartridges are accurate and work well. Has anyone any experience on game?

The wild paper plate target is a formidable game.... Never underestimate it....:kidding:

[TomBulls]

I worked up some paper patched bullets with Reloader 15, and just don't think that I'm doing it right.

I had a .316" diam. paper patched bullet for my 91/30, and it shot "okay" at 50 yards. It put five shots into a baseball sized group at 50 yards and then went downhill from there. My starting load was 36 grains of Reloader 15 at an estimated 2,300 fps. I shot three more sets of five, increasing two grains of powder for each set. Accuracy decreased rapidly with each set. The last set of five used 42 grains of Reloader 15, and it was printing about 12" at 50 yards. I also had some over-pressure signs with some of the primers starting to crater on the final set of five.

I might do better to try a different kind of patch material. But, for now, I'm doing better sticking with a light load of 5744 or 2400. I'll revisit this challenge later when I don't have to go shooting in single-digit temperature weather, and until then I'm going to get back to studying the other posts about paper patching.

[HABCAN]

As a suggestion, Tom, try patching 'bigger' to get more compression of the patch on firing. My own tests failed miserably until I patched to fit very tightly (without further expanding the necks) in FIRED cases thus filling the throat more. As posted here, forget 'bore' and patch for 'throat'. The LEE Factory Crimp Die is a very useful tool.

[TomBulls]

Suggesting that I patch to match the inside neck-diameter of a fired case and then restarting the testing? I'll give it a whirl and see what comes up.

[CJR]

TomBulls,

Some suggestions;
1. Do a "pound cast" to determine what type of chamber you're working with. It's possible the PP is being cut while chambering. Prepare a DUMMY round,i.e. NO powder, NO primer, and chamber it a couple of times to see if the PP is surviving the chambering process. Also, check to see if the chambering process is causing PPCB runout.
2. If you've been shooting jacketed through that rifle, it takes awhile for the PPCB to clean out the copper/fouling. A good bore paste srubbing/fire-lapping may speed things up.
3. You may have a PP slipping problem; i.e. not enough PP shrinkage force to hold PP onto CB ( from a dry PP) or not enough shrinkage force from the surface area of the PP (increase PP coverage area to increase PP holding stress). So next time at the range, when the groups open up, dry-brush the barrel and note where you get resistance; i.e. in front of the chamber, mid-barrel, or near muzzle. If the bore resistance is consistence, from chamber to muzzle, then the PP is surviving. If the PP is surviving then you need to look elsewhere; i.e. CB qualtiy, seating straightness, powder choices, better lube, etc.

Best regards,

CJR

[HABCAN]

+1 what CJR said.

[yondering]

One other thought - does that 91/30 have rifling right out to the muzzle, or has the muzzle been relieved for the last inch or so, as a lot of mil-surp rifles are? If it's been relieved, and there's any roughness there, it may be grabbing the patch and ruining accuracy. The bullet and patch must exit the bore cleanly, paper patching seems very sensitive to this, and crown imperfections make a big difference.

I had the same problem with a brake on my Whelen, the brake would grab the paper, and I could barely keep the shots on a large paper target at 50 yards. With the brake removed, it shot 1/2-3/4" groups @ 100 yards.

[TomBulls]

@CJR- Thanks for the pro-tips, I'll try those checks when I'm out shooting again.

@yondering- The rifling runs all the way out to the barrel's end, and it's in pretty good shape. I've shot about 50 paper patched cast bullets through it and it's "shining" now. I've been doing a _lot_ of reading and studying on the paper patch technique, and I'm really enjoying how intricate and complex that it can be.



What I've been reading is that the cast bullet should be sized "slightly" over bore diameter, and the patch should be sized .001" to .002" over groove diameter. Example: If my M48 slugs a .318" bore, but a .323" groove, then the cast bullet should (ideally) be somewhere around .319" - .320", and the final patched and sized bullet should be about .324" - .325".

I've also tried wrapping after wetting the patch with Sprite. I hear something about how the HFCS in the soda helps the patch adhere to itself better. I haven't managed to get such good accuracy that I could tell one way or the other, but the other readers around here are saying that nothing other than good old fashioned "water" is needed to do the job correctly.

[yondering]

What I've been reading is that the cast bullet should be sized "slightly" over bore diameter, and the patch should be sized .001" to .002" over groove diameter. Example: If my M48 slugs a .318" bore, but a .323" groove, then the cast bullet should (ideally) be somewhere around .319" - .320", and the final patched and sized bullet should be about .324" - .325".


That's traditional thinking anyway. Personally I had better results with high velocity smokeless loads when using a bit larger bullet, and sizing down after patching to the desired diameter. Compression of the paper was the key, it will compress about 50% of it's thickness, so patching to the final desired size leaves a lot of room for compression and a potentially loose bullet.

Personally, using grease groove bullets, in your example above I'd start with a .323" bullet, patch, then size to .325"+; this gave me the best accuracy. With a straight sided paper patch bullet though, I found the paper became loose with that method, so I had to start with a slightly smaller bullet, but not as small as bore diameter.

With black powder and soft lead bullets, swelling of the bullet during firing seems to provide the compression needed, but I found that wasn't always the case with smokeless loads. YMMV

[MaxJon]

Fwiw Paul Mathews book states ppcb work best at 100% load density.....

[Nobade]

Fwiw Paul Mathews book states ppcb work best at 100% load density.....Likewise in my experience. Stuff it full of the slowest powder practical and get the best results. I think the powder protects the bullet as it transitions through the throat. Faster powder blows gas past it and tears things up.

[MaxJon]

Awesome i think your right. I will be able to tell you in a couple of weeks! It's quite a different adventure from gg cast

[Good Cheer]

Yeah, blowing unburned 760 out the muzzle makes my favorite rifle very happy.
[smilie=w:

When developing loads my theory was to create an elongated pressure curve.
Lower pressure but longer duration. Whoosh the soft slug out of there to get higher velocity without plastic deformation of the base being detrimental to accuracy.

[Michael J. Spangler]

Ok so patching to finished diameter with no sizing is a bad thing?

So if I’m working with a .451 bore and .458 groove 45/70 I need to be about .453 patched to .462 and sized down to .460?
I’ve been using BACO 9# onion skin which gets me from .453 to .4595 or so. Not big enough to size down to compress the patch.
Should I just switch to my Bienfang 100% cotton vellum which gets up to about .462 with a finished wrap? The size down?

Seems it would be tough to get the onion skin to cover most needs due to how thin it is. At least with the traditional Mathews way of thinking with .001-.002" over bore size wrapped to .001-.002" over groove size.


I know that we're talking high velocity vs a 45/70 here but does the sized patch still apply?

I'm planning on playing with paper patch in a .308 pretty soon so this thread is going to be watched closely.

[MaxJon]

Yeah, blowing unburned 760 out the muzzle makes my favorite rifle very happy.
[smilie=w:

When developing loads my theory was to create an elongated pressure curve.
Lower pressure but longer duration. Whoosh the soft slug out of there to get higher velocity without plastic deformation of the base being detrimental to accuracy.

I like your thinking!

[303Guy]

Yeah, blowing unburned 760 out the muzzle makes my favorite rifle very happy.
[smilie=w:

When developing loads my theory was to create an elongated pressure curve.
Lower pressure but longer duration. Whoosh the soft slug out of there to get higher velocity without plastic deformation of the base being detrimental to accuracy.

I have some 780 - I wonder if that would work with heavies?

[Dan Cash]

Ok so patching to finished diameter with no sizing is a bad thing?

So if I’m working with a .451 bore and .458 groove 45/70 I need to be about .453 patched to .462 and sized down to .460?
I’ve been using BACO 9# onion skin which gets me from .453 to .4595 or so. Not big enough to size down to compress the patch.
Should I just switch to my Bienfang 100% cotton vellum which gets up to about .462 with a finished wrap? The size down?

Seems it would be tough to get the onion skin to cover most needs due to how thin it is. At least with the traditional Mathews way of thinking with .001-.002" over bore size wrapped to .001-.002" over groove size.


I know that we're talking high velocity vs a 45/70 here but does the sized patch still apply?

I'm planning on playing with paper patch in a .308 pretty soon so this thread is going to be watched closely.

While some people have good luck with sizing the patched bullet, it has never worked for me. For example of my method, for .30-40 I size the core to .303-.304 depending on the rifle. The core is wet patched with .002 thick tracing paper to .311-.312 and loaded. The results are 2 inch groups at 100 yards with bullets driven to jacketed velocities; 215 bullet at 2200 fps in the case of the .30-40.

[Michael J. Spangler]

While some people have good luck with sizing the patched bullet, it has never worked for me. For example of my method, for .30-40 I size the core to .303-.304 depending on the rifle. The core is wet patched with .002 thick tracing paper to .311-.312 and loaded. The results are 2 inch groups at 100 yards with bullets driven to jacketed velocities; 215 bullet at 2200 fps in the case of the .30-40.


Ok cool. I think when i tested my papers I had best results with the BACO which wrapped to about .4595” so no sizing was performed.

[Keith]

I am a newby to smokeless patching.
I am loading for a Martini in .303 British. Casting from wheelweights this 200 grainer, now with a gas check to stop some leading.
Still getting leading.
A previous post said all the bearing area should be patched. On this long bullet perhaps I should patch up past the bearing bands to near the nose.
All my patching has been black powder and I can find the patches.
I have fired over 50 of these from the Martini and yet to find any remains of a patch.
Is this normal or are my patches sticking to the bullet, going up range and destroying any accuracy?
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1794/43366191274_17ebdd0c7d_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/29584P1)IMG_2276 (https://flic.kr/p/29584P1) by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/141809689@N05/]

[MaxJon]

I am a newby to smokeless patching.
I am loading for a Martini in .303 British. Casting from wheelweights this 200 grainer, now with a gas check to stop some leading.
Still getting leading.
A previous post said all the bearing area should be patched. On this long bullet perhaps I should patch up past the bearing bands to near the nose.
All my patching has been black powder and I can find the patches.
I have fired over 50 of these from the Martini and yet to find any remains of a patch.
Is this normal or are my patches sticking to the bullet, going up range and destroying any accuracy?
https://farm2.staticflickr.com/1794/43366191274_17ebdd0c7d_k.jpg (https://flic.kr/p/29584P1)IMG_2276 (https://flic.kr/p/29584P1) by [url=https://www.flickr.com/photos/141809689@N05/]

With smokeless the patch turn to fine confetti at the muzzle, so finding the patch will be impossible I believe.

[303Guy]

The idea is to get the patch to come off as confetti at the muzzle. I developed a load for my Martini carbine barreled gun for the patch to just fully disintegrate. It shot great at first but then the bore polished up and the powder charge had to be increased to fully disintegrate the patch again.

[Keith]

I dry patch, so thought I should find something.
Those that iron on the waxed patch, they must still release OK.
Anyone have a pic of what is left of a smokeless patch. I have heaps of blackpowder ones.

[MaxJon]

I've only loaded 20 PP bullets in .308 this far. Groups were poor at 100m. I think my paper was too thin. I am about to try thicker tracing paper of .0035" and my PP mold drops a .301 bullet. By my calculations this adds up to .315" With a wet patch and stretch factor I'm hoping to size to .311"

[Dan Cash]

With smokeless the patch turn to fine confetti at the muzzle, so finding the patch will be impossible I believe.

I personally would patch to the start of the ogive. Also, it is likely that your patched projectile is a bit small and/or too deep in the cartridge case. I had a leading problem when trying to patch .300 Savage bullets in the 180-200 grain class. Base of bullet was below cartridge neck and recovered bullets showed extreme battering from powder grains from the base up to where the bullet was protected by the case neck.

Recovereed patch material will look like fine confetti when you find it.

[303Guy]

I dry patch, so thought I should find something.
Those that iron on the waxed patch, they must still release OK.
Anyone have a pic of what is left of a smokeless patch. I have heaps of blackpowder ones.
Picked up 15 yds downrange.
https://s19.postimg.cc/xqwrb8sn7/Base_Ring.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
Recovered from 'Test Tube'.
https://s19.postimg.cc/u4vjccbnn/MVC-795_F.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s19.postimg.cc/amdbcl9ar/1917_SMLE_217gr_5gr_AS30N.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s19.postimg.cc/itoaa8fer/001.jpg (https://postimages.org/)
https://s19.postimg.cc/h2ise1u37/DSCF8914.jpg (https://postimg.cc/image/mqp34xyfj/)
https://s19.postimg.cc/58i16tgcz/MVC-605_F.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

This last one is the carbine patch that shot MOA at 100m (110yds) with open sights. It wasn't long before the patch stopped coming off in strips due to bore polishing.

[CJR]

Keith,

Years ago, while shooting my standard 308 Win 3000+fps PPCB load (i.e. 150gr. LBTLFN w/50 gr. Win 748), I tried to find pieces of the paper patching by crawling around on the ground looking for it. I could not find any confetti. What I did see, after each shot, was a puff of white smoke.

Best regards,

CJR

[Keith]

Thanks. Its been windy here and the grass is fairly long. My old 45-70 patches are still laying around but no sign of any new ones. Cant see any white puffs either. I was thinking of getting one of the woven plastic feed bags I have here and holding it open some how and shooting through it to see what I can catch.

[303Guy]

I catch mine inside this.

https://s19.postimg.cc/szr1zup4z/MVC-558_F_edited.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

Inside is a bullet catcher. I recover the patch fragments on a cloth over the catcher - that's the cloth with fragments in my post above.

[barrabruce]

A old sheet layed out may be better to catch the paper patch.

I’d like a martini 303 as well.
Do they take full snot loads with out undue problems?
I would try to patch out down to 0.303” on the nose and see if that worked any better.
Usually bore + diameter works.
A small diameter pill can’t ride the lands at the engraving stage and can be canted at the first push.
As far as I figure anyway.
I have breachseated some undersized cores patched up and well lubed mouse fart loads but that’s a different animal all together.

[Keith]

As Dan said , I think my base is in the shoulder when the nose is pushed back by the rifling. I have ordered a shorter mold.

[303Guy]

I made a measuring tool - a simple brass rod with a mark on it that aligns with the neck junction and rear of the action. It has a rounded end to fit into the patch 'eye' on the base. I drop the boolit into the breach and see where the base will sit in the neck.

[Keith]

I drilled a hole in the back of an old case, put the bullet it the case and poke the rod in there to push the bullet into the lands , then mark the rod.
Works for me because the breech end has been drilled.
I think its a good mod because all my cleaning is from the breech end now.
The bullet had the paper engaging the rifling and the GC on the base was inside the neck. That might be causing my fliers.

[303Guy]

This is mine. I use it to push the boolit/bullet into the breach.

https://s19.postimg.cc/h9now1ncj/Bullet_Fit_Guage_4.jpg (https://postimages.org/)

https://s19.postimg.cc/avylsinir/Bullet_Fit_Guage_2.jpg (https://postimg.cc/image/aj77mc58v/)

The accuracy would depend on the chamber of course but all my LE's have the shoulder cose to spec. Close but not exact.



The bullet had the paper engaging the rifling and the GC on the base was inside the neck. That might be causing my fliers.

That's pretty much how I want mine to be. Base flush with neck/shoulder and ogive engaging the rifling. I don't want it to pull it out of the case when extracting an unfired round. My seating is quite firm and cannot be moved without using a press but bolt camming is powerful. So I make sure the boolit is not actually pushed back on chambering.

Here is a boolit showing the rifling contact. The gauge tells me how deep to seat it to get that degree of contact.

https://s19.postimg.cc/cb06hjm4j/GRITS_157_28_W748_001.jpg (https://postimages.org/)